Journal Article DKFZ-2018-00334

http://join2-wiki.gsi.de/foswiki/pub/Main/Artwork/join2_logo100x88.png
Multiple-rater kappas for binary data: Models and interpretation.

 ;  ;  ;

2018
Wiley-VCH Berlin

Biometrical journal 60(2), 381 - 394 () [10.1002/bimj.201600267]
 GO

This record in other databases:  

Please use a persistent id in citations: doi:

Abstract: Interrater agreement on binary measurements with more than two raters is often assessed using Fleiss' κ, which is known to be difficult to interpret. In situations where the same raters rate all items, however, the far less known κ suggested by Conger, Hubert, and Schouten is more appropriate. We try to support the interpretation of these characteristics by investigating various models or scenarios of rating. Our analysis, which is restricted to binary data, shows that conclusions concerning interrater agreement by κ heavily depend on the population of items or subjects considered, even if the raters have identical behavior. The standard scale proposed by Landis and Koch, which verbally interprets numerical values of κ, appears to be rather subjective. On the basis of one of the models for rater behavior, we suggest an alternative verbal interpretation for kappa. Finally, we reconsider a classical example from pathology to illustrate the application of our methods and models. We also look for subgroups of raters with similar rating behavior using hierarchical clustering.

Classification:

Contributing Institute(s):
  1. Biostatistik (C060)
Research Program(s):
  1. 313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313) (POF3-313)

Appears in the scientific report 2018
Database coverage:
Medline ; BIOSIS Previews ; IF < 5 ; JCR ; NationallizenzNationallizenz ; SCOPUS ; Science Citation Index Expanded ; Thomson Reuters Master Journal List ; Web of Science Core Collection
Click to display QR Code for this record

The record appears in these collections:
Document types > Articles > Journal Article
Public records
Publications database

 Record created 2018-04-05, last modified 2024-02-29



Rate this document:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Not yet reviewed)